iStudentUK
Mar 27, 10:58 AM
Oh? He chose to leave those two significant letters out of his post. :confused:
Some more cynical than me (impossible) might consider that disinformation. :rolleyes:
That guy in the MSN video rasmasyean linked is a bit of a douche. Especially when he says "if we take our toys home this is all over ... its pretty much us [USA]". This isn't a game and these aren't toys. A little under half the forces are US, Britain and France are next, but there are over a dozen countries that have committed forces.
Many of the countries in this coalition could do this alone- US, France and Britain all have airbases within range, attack subs/ships to fire missiles, reconnaissance planes, special forces to gain intelligence and easily enough fighters to attack ground targets and what is left of the Libyan airforce. However, it just looks like everyone is trying to make sure that no single country dominates.
With Iraq and Afghanistan the West need to be careful not to make this look like another invasion, but instead helping repressed people succeed in their revolution. Contributions and support from some Middle Eastern states (Qatar and the UAE have both sent fighters) help reinforce this. Making sure the UN and NATO are involved keeps this from becoming one country attacking another and hopefully avoids more hatred targeted towards the West.
Some more cynical than me (impossible) might consider that disinformation. :rolleyes:
That guy in the MSN video rasmasyean linked is a bit of a douche. Especially when he says "if we take our toys home this is all over ... its pretty much us [USA]". This isn't a game and these aren't toys. A little under half the forces are US, Britain and France are next, but there are over a dozen countries that have committed forces.
Many of the countries in this coalition could do this alone- US, France and Britain all have airbases within range, attack subs/ships to fire missiles, reconnaissance planes, special forces to gain intelligence and easily enough fighters to attack ground targets and what is left of the Libyan airforce. However, it just looks like everyone is trying to make sure that no single country dominates.
With Iraq and Afghanistan the West need to be careful not to make this look like another invasion, but instead helping repressed people succeed in their revolution. Contributions and support from some Middle Eastern states (Qatar and the UAE have both sent fighters) help reinforce this. Making sure the UN and NATO are involved keeps this from becoming one country attacking another and hopefully avoids more hatred targeted towards the West.
twoodcc
Aug 6, 08:41 PM
wow, that's some bold statements by Apple. i'm sure that they'll back them up though
gkarris
Nov 27, 09:04 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Didn't you read this post and the article attached?
"but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me"
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.
(note: I would suggest you see my comp specs and gear below before reading my post further)
Perhaps it is an oversight of Apples that they sell both consumer and pro-sumer computers, and yet only offer a pro-sumer monitor. However considering that 2 of the 3 consumer computers by Apple have built in monitors, and the 3rd is meant to be used with exisiting mouse, keyboard and monitor, it may not be such a big deal.
Also, if you want cheaper, there exists cheaper. It's not as if Apple is robbing you of much needed options in montior selection by not offering a cheap monitor. Any monitor made today will work with your Mac. The only thing they are robbing you of is their design.
Now don't anyone bring up the "Apple is bad because of what I can get from Dell" topic again until you read this very carefully (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
.
In summery though, Apple uses a different, far more advanced color accurate panel for their monitors. This allows them certification that they pay for. They also pay someone with a design background to make the casing, and don't have the EE's do it like at some companies :rolleyes:
Now, back on topic :)
I was in the "Apple needs to make a 17" monitor" crowd for a long time. Than I bought a cheap 20" wide display, and I love it. I suppose with Photography and a few games here and there, there is a reason I'm inclined to now say I wouldn't use a smaller screen. But unless Apple wants to sell a consumer display (which they don't currently do), to be used with the Mac Mini, I really don't see much of a reason for Apple to do it. A pro-sumer 17" display is useless and pointless IMHO. If you have a 3 grand G5 doing professional graphics/video work, you aren't going to buy a pro-sumer 17" monitor for $400 :rolleyes:
That said, if Apple had offered a consumer level 20" wide monitor at a similar price point to Dells, I'd have bought it hands down.
It's clearly known that Apple monitors are pro quality and Dell ones are cheap consumer quality, hence the price difference...
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 07:50 AM
PSP interface is so cumbersome, though. Just have a laptop.
BRLawyer
Apr 19, 03:31 PM
This is What I Wanna See:
iMac 27" (Quad Core)
$1,999.99 (Base)
Mac OS X 10.7 Lion
white free clip art,
rock climbing silhouettes
iMac 27" (Quad Core)
$1,999.99 (Base)
Mac OS X 10.7 Lion
sorepheet
Apr 11, 07:31 AM
Currently own a 2007 Toyota Yaris manual transmission and LOVE it! Average 33 MPG, best MPG to date: 46!!!
Xanderxxx
Aug 6, 09:36 PM
"Mac OS X Leopard, Introducing Vista 2.0"
"Mac OS X Leopard, Hasta la Vista, Vista"
VINCENT:
are a digital clip art,
Climbing Clipart #11335 by Geo
Nautical Rock Cover clip art
Technical Rock Climbing Black
Rock+climbing+clip+art
vector about free clip art
.jpg "+rock+climbing+clip+art")
+rock+climbing+clip+art
woman rock-climbing art
Bear i did it clipart Gomugs,
How to Maintain Rock Climbing
Rock Climber Kdw Clip Art. Rock Climber Kdw middot; By: Cheryl Walker 5.0/10 0 votes
Rock+climbing+clip+art
"Mac OS X Leopard, Hasta la Vista, Vista"
VINCENT:
ffakr
Nov 25, 04:59 PM
Doh.. forgive this post, my safari session flipped out and I didn't realise this posted.
SamEllens
Apr 12, 09:14 PM
Does anyone else think there will also be an update to QT X as well? Probably one of the most useless tools on the Mac right now. QTPro is still more useful for work. Just the idea that the buttons cover up the picture at all makes QTX pretty useless. I hope to see a real QTPro X. Bring back the FRAME counter (not just time) and get those controls OFF the picture!!!
YES! Frame counter AND source TC! I still use QT Pro for everything.
YES! Frame counter AND source TC! I still use QT Pro for everything.
Yakuza
Nov 24, 03:27 PM
As for me this are the things i purchased:
100 capsules of Nespresso and a descaling kit.
Man how i love this coffee :D
and from ebay a macintosh classic pin (not my photo) and a classic logo sticker for my mpb. haven't received it yet.
100 capsules of Nespresso and a descaling kit.
Man how i love this coffee :D
and from ebay a macintosh classic pin (not my photo) and a classic logo sticker for my mpb. haven't received it yet.
appleguy123
Mar 20, 06:26 PM
Maybe Apple should ban all religious apps.
In a way, religion is very like homeopathy, since it pretends that something non-existant has the ability to cure/help/heal etc.
Like homeopathy, religion can encourage one to do nothing of value ('let's pray for Japan', 'let's try to cure cancer with just water') rather than something physical which actually has an effect. It could be construed as being dangerous and damaging in that sense.
Imagine if Apple actually banned all religious apps. I bet that they would lose a substantial amount of sales. I know people at my church (when I was still religious) who would buy iOS stuff just for using bible apps.
In a way, religion is very like homeopathy, since it pretends that something non-existant has the ability to cure/help/heal etc.
Like homeopathy, religion can encourage one to do nothing of value ('let's pray for Japan', 'let's try to cure cancer with just water') rather than something physical which actually has an effect. It could be construed as being dangerous and damaging in that sense.
Imagine if Apple actually banned all religious apps. I bet that they would lose a substantial amount of sales. I know people at my church (when I was still religious) who would buy iOS stuff just for using bible apps.
Homy
Jan 3, 09:39 AM
iMac 17" is not in stock anywhere in european Apple Stores and other web shops. Ships after 3 days, it says. In Canada all iMacs ship after 3-5 days.:cool:
hyperpasta
Jul 18, 02:03 PM
Rentals are stupid...what if something comes up and I can't watch my movie within the alotted time? I'm just screwed, then?
Actually, other online movie rental services serve up "frozen" movies. You can keep a frozen movie for a month without it expiring. To watch it, you must "thaw" the movie. Then it expires a week later. In this way, you can download a movie when convenient and watch when convenient... not much pressure at all. Simply thaw the movie when you're ready to watch.
The only way I see this being announced at WWDC is if it ties in with Leopard's rumored BitTorrent feature. However, this doesn't make much sense, since what will Tiger/Panther/Windows users do to get movies?
Actually, other online movie rental services serve up "frozen" movies. You can keep a frozen movie for a month without it expiring. To watch it, you must "thaw" the movie. Then it expires a week later. In this way, you can download a movie when convenient and watch when convenient... not much pressure at all. Simply thaw the movie when you're ready to watch.
The only way I see this being announced at WWDC is if it ties in with Leopard's rumored BitTorrent feature. However, this doesn't make much sense, since what will Tiger/Panther/Windows users do to get movies?
slu
Jul 18, 10:07 AM
Good. I want to be able to rent TV shows as well. You can really only watch The Daily Show once.
Let me sum it up for everyone:
Renting music = Bad
Renting video = Good
Let me sum it up for everyone:
Renting music = Bad
Renting video = Good
kelving525
Sep 23, 02:46 PM
Do you feel the same about the Night Sky color, or is it more the Aquamarine and Fuscia and neon blinding green? The Night Sky one looks pretty cool. I have no problem with purple colors as long as they are dark, which the Night Sky seems to be from pictures.
Yes, it is definitely dark purple-- not those neon purple.:cool:
Yes, it is definitely dark purple-- not those neon purple.:cool:
emotion
Aug 16, 07:36 AM
Wonder if the wireless ipod wont be the iphone.
I'm thinking this too. I thnk the rumours of a new nano enclosure may also be the iphone. I guess we'll see but as Chundles points out this isn't the most reliable source of info (Digitimes).
I'm thinking this too. I thnk the rumours of a new nano enclosure may also be the iphone. I guess we'll see but as Chundles points out this isn't the most reliable source of info (Digitimes).
hellomoto4
Apr 7, 07:41 AM
I've also noticed that Spotlight has been pretty screwed up. First off it's been indexing every other day which is unnecessary, and while it's indexing it will say ridiculous things like "35 hours remaining" with it finishing soon after.
I think they mean minutes. :rolleyes:
Yeah often when I boot to Lion after booting to SL it'll want to index again. The first time it indexed I got an estimated time of 18 days, although it completed in maybe two hours. Now if it indexes again I'll get an estimate of around 30 hours but it would complete in ten minutes. Weird.
I think they mean minutes. :rolleyes:
Yeah often when I boot to Lion after booting to SL it'll want to index again. The first time it indexed I got an estimated time of 18 days, although it completed in maybe two hours. Now if it indexes again I'll get an estimate of around 30 hours but it would complete in ten minutes. Weird.
tigres
Apr 3, 07:38 AM
I don't have one, however I did like this ad.
Curious if the same marketing company that does the current ip4 commercials does this one; as many have stated opinions of how terrible it is.
This ad has class, the "if you don't have an iPhone", not so much.
Curious if the same marketing company that does the current ip4 commercials does this one; as many have stated opinions of how terrible it is.
This ad has class, the "if you don't have an iPhone", not so much.
colonelsanders
Mar 25, 12:19 AM
Per your comment below, I think you might be misunderstanding Crossfire.
The MP does have an upgrade option to include two 5770's that will allow you to drive up to six displays. This is great but this should not be confused with crossfire.
If they were set up in crossfire you would only be able to drive 3 monitors as you would be limited to the output of your primary card. The second card acts as extra processing load for the primary card while set up in crossfire. Additionally if they were setup in crossfire you would see a bridge between the two cards.
As far as i know Apple has never supported crossfire or sli. They have however supported multi gpus in one machine.
Well then, Apple is gonna confuse alot of people with the 5770 crossfire MP upgrade. Look it up folks, crossfire is supported
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro?mco=MTg5MTY5NDQ
The MP does have an upgrade option to include two 5770's that will allow you to drive up to six displays. This is great but this should not be confused with crossfire.
If they were set up in crossfire you would only be able to drive 3 monitors as you would be limited to the output of your primary card. The second card acts as extra processing load for the primary card while set up in crossfire. Additionally if they were setup in crossfire you would see a bridge between the two cards.
As far as i know Apple has never supported crossfire or sli. They have however supported multi gpus in one machine.
Well then, Apple is gonna confuse alot of people with the 5770 crossfire MP upgrade. Look it up folks, crossfire is supported
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/mac_pro?mco=MTg5MTY5NDQ
cube
Mar 24, 04:00 PM
Intel has had years developing graphics as well. That statement by itself really doesn't say anything.
Functionality wins over a supposed performance edge? Your whole argument is based on how Llano is supposedly going to be faster than Sandy Bridge. You have yet to state any OpenCL applications that you are using or plan on using in the future yet suddenly you need it NOW because you saw some AMD propaganda video on their YouTube channel. The fact of the matter is, Llano has a VERY slim chance of coming to Macs so it's high time you get over that video and just enjoy Sandy Bridge if you are only buying computers from Apple. If you really needed that extra power then you wouldn't be buying a machine with only an IGP to begin with.
What history? Developing crappy integrated graphics?
I missed writing "SMALL performance edge".
My assessment is not based on a small performance edge. It is based on Fusion enabling a whole new set of functionality thanks to OpenCL and DirectX 11 class hardware.
I established my preference BEFORE watching that video. That Sandy Bridge performs so poor in that demo just confirms my choice.
Functionality wins over a supposed performance edge? Your whole argument is based on how Llano is supposedly going to be faster than Sandy Bridge. You have yet to state any OpenCL applications that you are using or plan on using in the future yet suddenly you need it NOW because you saw some AMD propaganda video on their YouTube channel. The fact of the matter is, Llano has a VERY slim chance of coming to Macs so it's high time you get over that video and just enjoy Sandy Bridge if you are only buying computers from Apple. If you really needed that extra power then you wouldn't be buying a machine with only an IGP to begin with.
What history? Developing crappy integrated graphics?
I missed writing "SMALL performance edge".
My assessment is not based on a small performance edge. It is based on Fusion enabling a whole new set of functionality thanks to OpenCL and DirectX 11 class hardware.
I established my preference BEFORE watching that video. That Sandy Bridge performs so poor in that demo just confirms my choice.
windows311
Sep 15, 02:28 AM
CR hasn't been relevant in at least 5 years. Another mag that made a terrible transition to the web. Welcome to the interweb CR, now will you please hire a web designer? Your site is embarrassing.
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 26, 01:58 PM
apple created a storefront they called "app store"
amazon creates a store front that does the same t hing called the "appstore"
apple wins in this situation.
amazon creates a store front that does the same t hing called the "appstore"
apple wins in this situation.
kadajawi
Sep 7, 03:36 AM
Well I posted it in another thread however I just built a PC with some amazing specs for under $500. It was a P4 3ghz, 2gb ram, 250GB HD, 256MB GPU, DVDR, bluetooth, wifi. The kicker is it's a Shuttle so it's tiny, not much bigger than a mini, and it's made of aluminum. The thing is very Mac like. And being able to build it so cost effectively, really ticked me off.
Because no matter what I'd get on the Apple side it would either cost much, much more or it would be hobbled in some way (GPU, monitor, etc.). In the end you have to realize that as a Mac user you're paying more for a brand and for the ability to run OS X. That's fine, provided you can find a system which meets your needs.
(yeah it's late and I'm cranky) :P
Yes, I was about to build one with a Athlon 64 3000+ (doesn't eat up electricity like the P4... and with RM Clock or so you can reduce power consumption quite a bit additionally. The default voltages are usually far above whats needed, both AMDs I've built run perfectly with 1.1V (standard is 1.4 to 1.45), unfortunately it isn't possible to lover the voltage further), 512 MB RAM, 160 GB HD, onboard graphics, DVDR, in a 9x27.5x35 cm enclosure. Price with Windows: around 400 �. Bluetooth and WiFi is lacking, but shouldn't add too much. In comparison the Mac Mini Core Solo was 600 � at that time. I'd consider both systems comparable... Mini has front row, BT and WiFi, PC has better connectivity (especially on the display side), 100 gig more HD, DVD writer, card reader. Quite a price difference to me.
Lack of OS X + iLife, the upgrade to Core Duo, student discount and the printer promo made me chose the Mac Mini.
Because no matter what I'd get on the Apple side it would either cost much, much more or it would be hobbled in some way (GPU, monitor, etc.). In the end you have to realize that as a Mac user you're paying more for a brand and for the ability to run OS X. That's fine, provided you can find a system which meets your needs.
(yeah it's late and I'm cranky) :P
Yes, I was about to build one with a Athlon 64 3000+ (doesn't eat up electricity like the P4... and with RM Clock or so you can reduce power consumption quite a bit additionally. The default voltages are usually far above whats needed, both AMDs I've built run perfectly with 1.1V (standard is 1.4 to 1.45), unfortunately it isn't possible to lover the voltage further), 512 MB RAM, 160 GB HD, onboard graphics, DVDR, in a 9x27.5x35 cm enclosure. Price with Windows: around 400 �. Bluetooth and WiFi is lacking, but shouldn't add too much. In comparison the Mac Mini Core Solo was 600 � at that time. I'd consider both systems comparable... Mini has front row, BT and WiFi, PC has better connectivity (especially on the display side), 100 gig more HD, DVD writer, card reader. Quite a price difference to me.
Lack of OS X + iLife, the upgrade to Core Duo, student discount and the printer promo made me chose the Mac Mini.
celticpride678
Apr 1, 11:02 PM
Use the dev version instead. A lot more stable than the beta one.
Which is kind of ironic.
Google is likely going to be updating the dev build of Chrome to work with Lion has they have been doing over the past month, rather than the stable or beta builds.
Which is kind of ironic.
Google is likely going to be updating the dev build of Chrome to work with Lion has they have been doing over the past month, rather than the stable or beta builds.